What Conditions That Lead To Guerrilla Warfare And Distinguishes Revolutionary Guerrilla Warfare?

Today in time guerrilla warfare is used by one of the strongest armies of the world. These tactics were used even back during the revolutionary war. In the movie the Patriot, this movie portrays the fight during the revolutionary war and the battles and the horror they faced. The battlegrounds used in the war were a person's backyard. This new idea of guerilla warfare brought to the war was unconventional and efficient. There were small militias taking out countless redcoats. Although it wasn't the traditional form of fighting it worked. In the movie, the militia was led by Benjamin Martin. General Martin and his militias tactics were honorable.

I agree with the definition of insurgency based on various historical events I will later discuss in this essay. These events provide a vivid depiction of the very definition of insurgency which is outlined in JP1-02. United States (US) history along with conflicts that have occurred in other countries have demonstrated countless times over

Beyond the lack of support from the United States’ citizens, the biggest reason that we lost was the lack of intel in regards to the enemy and the land. Before the Vietnam War, most of our wars had a very obvious enemy that we were fighting but this war was not the case. The most common enemy in this war which was referred to as North Vietnamese and they used a Guerrilla Warfare tactic and would blend in with the Vietnamese citizens. Guerrilla Warfare is also known as a hit and run tactic, the enemy would attack and then as quickly as they attacked they would disappear into the jungle without giving the United States the ability to mobilize and counter attack. The other tactic that the North Vietnamese that hurt the United States ability

In every major military operation, terrain, troops and weapons often dictate the way the war is fought. The American Revolutionary War was a prime example of this military strategy. It is often said that the Patriots’ use of guerrilla warfare was the reason why the Americans were successful in defeating the British. However, the Americans employed various tactics both on and off the battlefield that led to the ultimate defeat of the British. The American Patriots won the Revolutionary War not through the sole use of guerrilla warfare, but rather through an amalgamation of guerrilla warfare, linear battle tactics, and the employment of espionage.

The Vietnam War began, because of Indochina (Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia) being conquered by the Japanese, in 1941. This led to the creation of the Vietnamese nationalist movement, formed by Ho Chi Minh to resist the Japanese. The Vietnamese national movement also known as the Vietminh, was a communist front organization. To stop the spread of communism through Asia, the United States intervened. The war lasted for 19-20 years, and involved countries such as South Vietnam, North Vietnam, United States, South Korea, Australia, Philippines, New Zealand, Thailand, Khmer Republic, Laos and the Republic of China. The war was known as a guerrilla war, which meant the use of tactics such as ambush, sabotage and petty warfare. Guerrilla warfare is a very unconventional style of warfare. It is when small groups of soldiers use stealthy tactics to inflict damage on the target. The casualties suffered by both sides were immense however, the Communists had the upper hand throughout the majority of the war. Not only was it their home turf, they also had the support of a large percentage of the civilian population. The effective use of guerrilla tactics by the Viet Cong played a very important role on the outcome of the war, and is also the primary reason why the United States lost. The following essay will outline the reasons why the guerrilla tactics used by the Viet Cong played a very important role on the outcome of the Vietnam War. The first paragraph will

The second half of the 20th Century saw the development of nuclear weapons, jet fighters and helicopters. The significance of nuclear weapons is illustrated in the Vietnam War, where the Americans, who were in possession of such weapons, posed a huge threat to the Vietnamese who lacked them. This drawback lead the latter to instigate guerrilla warfare, as it was the only possible way to oppose the Americans. This war demonstrates how the development of such destructive nuclear weapons lead to unconventional types of warfare. Irregular warfare due to advanced technology also had a huge impact on structure and organisation of forces. For example, in the Soviet war against Afghanistan, the occupation of the Soviets in major urban centres antagonised the civilians, and subsequently provoked uprisings. The Soviets found themselves drawn into fighting against the Ishtar and the Mujahedeen, which forced them to abandon conventional “front lines” and instead form disorderly groups to try and oppress the rebels. This irregular warfare was especially intense as the side that couldn’t compete technologically with the opposition waged ferocious wars. For example the Mujahedeen launched relentless ambushes and raids on the Soviets, keeping their initiative through offensive action. This type of fighting also affected the civilians, who were frequently targeted by the Soviets due to their support of the Mujahedeen.

No one person wakes in the morning and decides to tackle years of institutional rule without thinking certain doom, discomfort, or in some cases, death. Citizens living during the times within the United States (1775 – 1784) and Vietnam (1955 – 1975) decided to fight as one voice, for a cause they believed and shared together. This unified voice, the will of the people, started as a single voice. Soon there were many voices with the same cry, to push out policies, ideals, and laws that were not their own. Peaceful talks, debates, or discussions did not work, soon there was no other means but the violence to break the will to continue.

An ideological war is like guerrilla war, since the enemy is an idea whose proponents are not in uniform but

The North Vietnamese Communist leadership's ability to reassess and adapt during the Vietnam War was reflected in how well they combined guerilla and conventional operations to achieve their strategic goal of unifying Vietnam under communist rule. Throughout the conflict, the Viet Cong (VC) were employed to conduct guerilla operations while North Vietnamese Army (NVA) and VC "main force" units were used to transition to conventional operations. Guerilla operations enabled Hanoi to inflict a steady flow of casualties on US forces which increased anti-war sentiment in America. NVA and VC main force conventional operations reinforced the US Army's conventional approach to the fight which caused the Americans to alienate the people of South

Irregular warfare has become the centre of much military and academic study in recent years, due mostly to the ongoing NATO operations in Afghanistan. However irregular warfare is by no means a recent revelation in the evolution of warfare and strategy, numerous examples exist throughout history in which irregular warfare tactics and strategy have been adopted and later analysed by academics and military professionals. This author will focus on the key issues that governments face in creating effective strategies for irregular warfare with a particular emphasis on counter-insurgency (COIN) and terrorism. Resources such as time, space, legitimacy and support present themselves as key issues in dealing with insurgency and terrorism and are

A sneaky, stealthy war tactic called Guerilla Warfare won the American Revolutionary War for the Patriots. Guerrilla warfare is a tactic that was practiced a lot in the revolutionary war and was without a doubt one of the few reasons the Patriots defeated the British. Guerrilla warfare helped the colonists win the Revolutionary war. This tactic was used successfully used in the Battle of Trenton, the Battle of Lexington and Concord, and was widely practiced by Francis Marion in the south.

In every major military operation, terrain, troops, and weapons often dictate the way the war is fought. The American Revolutionary War was a prime example of this military policy. It has been said that the Patriots’ use of guerrilla warfare was the reason why the Americans were successful in defeating the British. However, the Americans employed various tactics both on and off the battlefield that led to the ultimate defeat of the British. Though guerrilla warfare was an important facet of the Patriots’ military strategy against the British, the Americans ultimately won the Revolutionary War through an amalgamation of guerrilla warfare, linear battle tactics, and psychological warfare.

This paper will be explaining the similarities, and differences, between the Vietnam War and the War in Afghanistan. There are many topics that bring these two wars together. However, I am only going to be talking about public support, policy objectives, military strategy, weapons, fighting spirit, links to home, and death totals. These topics have a lot of information about them, but there is too much to write about every little detail, so I will cover the broad overview of them. Each paragraph will be about one of the topics. There will also be a discussion about insurgencies and counter insurgency operations. These are two big topics in Vietnam and Afghanistan since almost all of the enemy in both wars were, and are, comprised of insurgents and different types of militia groups.

A small country such as North Vietnam was able to win a war against a superpower like the United States of America, through, namely, tactics – such as Guerrilla Warfare -, the ignorance of their enemy, the attitude of the South Vietnamese, as well as a strong leader such as Ho Chi Minh. The Vietnam War was a major conflict (of the Cold War) which lasted from 1959 to 1975 , with US involvement from 1964 to 1973 . US reasons for their involvement in the war was their fear of “The Domino Effect” - or – the US fear that communism would spread to Vietnam and Southeast Asia, making them a major threat to national security. The Fall of Saigon marked the end of the war in 1975.

Giulio Douhet, in his seminal treatise on air power titled The Command of the Air, argued, “A man who wants to make a good instrument must first have a precise understanding of what the instrument is to be used for; and he who intends to build a good instrument of war must first ask himself what the next war will be like.” The United States (US) military establishment has been asking itself this exact question for hundreds of years, in an attempt to be better postured for the future. From the Civil War, through the American Indian Wars, and up until World War II (WWII) the American military’s way of war consisted of fighting traditional, or conventional, wars focused on total annihilation of an enemy. Since that time, there has been a gradual shift from the traditional framework towards one that can properly address non-traditional, or irregular wars. While the US maintains a capability to conduct conventional warfare, the preponderance of operations where the US military has been engaged since WWII have been irregular wars. Therefore, this question articulated by Douhet, as to understanding the character of the next war in order to properly plan, train, and equip, is certainly germane to the current discussion of regular war versus irregular war. In today’s fiscally constrained environment, the questions remains, which will dominate the future and therefore, garner further funding and priority. Based on the current threats and the US role as a superpower, the US